Prepared for submission to JHEP

Holographic entanglement density for spontaneous

symmetry breaking
arXiv:2203.07612v1 [hep-th] 15 Mar 2022

Hyun-Sik Jeong,a,b Keun-Young Kim,c,d and Ya-Wen Suna,b

a
School of physics & CAS Center for Excellence in Topological Quantum Computation, University
of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Zhongguancun east road 80, Beijing 100049, China
b
Kavli Institute for Theoretical Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Zhongguancun east road 80, Beijing 100049, China
c
Department of Physics and Photon Science, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology,
123 Cheomdan-gwagiro, Gwangju 61005, Korea
d
Research Center for Photon Science Technology, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology,
123 Cheomdan-gwagiro, Gwangju 61005, Korea

E-mail: hyunsik@ucas.ac.cn, fortoe@gist.ac.kr, yawen.sun@ucas.ac.cn

Abstract: We investigate the properties of the holographic entanglement entropy of

the systems in which the U (1) or the translational symmetry is broken spontaneously.
For this purpose, we define the entanglement density of the strip-subsystems and examine
both the first law of entanglement entropy (FLEE) and the area theorem. We classify the
conditions that FLEE and/or the area theorem obey and show that such a classification
may be useful for characterizing the systems. We also find universalities from both FLEE
and the area theorem. In the spontaneous symmetry breaking case, FLEE is always obeyed
regardless of the type of symmetry: U (1) or translation. For the translational symmetry,
the area theorem is always violated when the symmetry is weakly broken, independent
of the symmetry breaking patterns (explicit or spontaneous). We also argue that the log
contribution of the entanglement entropy from the Goldstone mode may not appear in the
strongly coupled systems.
Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Setup 5
2.1 Holographic entanglement density 5
2.2 Dimensionless entanglement density: σ/s 9

3 Broken U (1) symmetry 10

3.1 The model 10
3.2 Normal phase: a review 11
3.3 Superconducting phase 13

4 Broken translational symmetry 15

4.1 The model 15
4.2 First law of entanglement entropy 16
4.3 Area theorem 18

5 Conclusions 21

1 Introduction

Entanglement entropy has been playing an important role in the investigation of quantum
gravity and quantum field theory. In particular, with the Ryu-Takayanagi formula [1, 2],
the holographic duality (or gauge/gravity duality) [3–5] provides a remarkable connec-
tion between gravity theory and conformal field theory: a geometric quantity in the bulk
spacetime can be related to the entanglement entropy of the boundary field theory. In
other words, the Ryu-Takayanagi formula gives us a hint to understand the emergence of
spacetime from the entanglement properties in the dual field theory (e.g., see also [6–10]).
In addition to its role in quantum gravity, entanglement entropy has also been used in
condensed matter physics: entanglement entropy may also play an important role in charac-
terizing and classifying the phases of matter.1 For instance, entanglement entropy between
the subsystem and the rest of the system could exhibit characteristic behavior of entangle-
ment entropy with the subsystem size `: for (d + 1) dimensions, entanglement entropy has a
log(`d ) contribution from the Goldstone boson [13], `d log ` from the Fermi surface [14–17],
or `-independent behavior from the topologically ordered degrees of freedom [18–21].
1
See [11] for a review of quantum entanglement in condensed matter physics. See also [12] for recent
progress in quantum entanglement in many-body systems using SYK model and its generalizations.

–1–
Entanglement entropy in holography: Inspired from the properties of entanglement
entropy with the subsystem size ` in condensed matter physics, it is instructive to investi-
gate the `-dependence of entanglement entropy in holography.
Using the Ryu-Takayanagi formula (2.5), one can find interesting features of entan-
glement entropy in the small (`  1) or large (`  1) subsystem limit. For the small
subsystem, “entanglement thermodynamics” may apply. In particular, when the system is
excited entanglement entropy at `  1 may obey a property analogous to the first law of
thermodynamics, called the first law of entanglement entropy— (FLEE) [22]2 :

1
∆S = ∆E , (`  1) (1.1)
Tent

where ∆S := S − SCFT is the increased amount of the entanglement entropy in excited

states, S, compared with the ground state of the CFT, SCFT (2.12). ∆E is the corresponding
amount of energy in the subsystem given by
Z
∆E = dd x hTtt i , (1.2)

where hTtt i is the energy density of the excited state.3 Tent in (1.1) is called the entanglement
temperature [22, 35], which is proportional to the inverse of the subsystem size as Tent ∼
1/`. Note that Tent is universal in that it only depends on the shape of the subsystem and
the dimension d, i.e., Tent may not depend on the details of the excited states.
In this paper, we consider a strip subsystem of width ` in the x-direction in d = 2 (i.e.,
the dual gravity is asymptotically AdS4 ): see Fig. 2. In this setup [22], ∆E in (1.2) and
Tent is

!2
4 Γ 43 1
∆E = ` Ω hTtt i , Tent = 1

, (1.3)
Γ 4 π `

where Ω is the length in the y-direction. Thus, FLEE (1.1) implies ∆S ∼ hTtt i `2 at small
`.
For the large subsystem, the entanglement entropy of the excited state, S, behaves as

S = sV + αA + ... , (`  1) (1.4)

where s is the thermal entropy density, α is a dimensionful constant, and . . . denotes

further sub-leading terms of O(`−1 ). Note that (1.4) consists of two terms: i) the “volume
law” term (∝ V = ` Ω) in which V is the volume of the strip; ii) the “area law” term
(∝ A = 2 Ω) where A is the area of the one-dimensional boundary of the strip.4 .
The volume law term is the leading contribution of S, which may be expected for
excited states, e.g., a thermal state, in that when ` → ∞ the subsystem becomes the
2
FLEE has been extensively investigated in many holographic models [9, 23–48].
3
Note that hTtt i of the ground state of the CFT (or the pure AdS) is zero so that ∆hTtt i = hTtt i.
4
(1.4) may also contain other types of area terms such as A log A which corresponds to an area law
violation [49]

–2–
entire system so that the minimal surface lies along the horizon [50, 51] implying that the
Ryu-Takayanagi formula (2.5) may be related with the thermal entropy density s.
The area law term [52–55] is a sub-leading contribution of S with the parameter α
in which α could be expressed as a sum of several terms, in general. For instance, for the
vacuum state of the CFT (in which s = 0), SCFT in (2.12), α is a sum of two terms: one
from the UV divergence 1/, the other 1/` [1, 2].
In addition to the appearance of thermal entropy density (s) in the leading term of
S, one can also find an interesting property from the sub-leading term with α: the area
theorem [2, 56–58]. The area theorem is a variant of the c-theorem5 , which states that the
value of α at UV/IR fixed points obeys the following inequality

αUV ≥ αIR , (1.6)

where the field theoretic proof was given for a sphere in d = 3 with strong sub-additivity
in [57] or for a sphere in d ≥ 3 with the positivity of relative entropy [58], and for a strip in
d ≥ 3 with the Null Energy Condition (NEC) [56] in which the NEC may be holographically
dual to strong sub-additivity [78, 79].

Entanglement density σ: In order to examine α, it is useful to introduce the entangle-

ment density σ [42]6 defined as

S − SCFT ∆S
σ := = , (1.7)
V V
which yields a finite value because the UV divergence 1/ is canceled out. In terms of σ
(1.7), the large subsystem behavior of the entanglement entropy (1.4) can be expressed as

A
σ = s − ∆α + ... , (`  1) (1.8)
V
where the sub-leading term, A/V , is order of O(1/`) and ∆α is defined

∆α = αCFT − α , (1.9)

which may be interpreted as αUV − αIR [42, 43, 82].7 Thus, using (1.9), the area theorem
(1.6) can be rephrased as ∆α ≥ 0.
5
Considering how entanglement entropy behaves under a renormalization group (RG) flow, the inter-
esting theorem, the c-theorem [59], has been derived in the two-dimensional conformal field theory, which
states that the central charge c decreases along the RG flow as

cUV ≥ cIR , (1.5)

where the c-function is a monotonically decreasing function of the energy scale and equals the central charge
c at fixed points. For higher dimensions, there are other type of theorems without using the central charge
(recall that there are more than two central charges in higher dimension). For instance, the a-theorem [60–62]
with the anomaly a and the F -theorem [63, 64] with the free energy F . See also [57, 65–77].
6
σ is not the entanglement density [80, 81] defined as the second derivative of entanglement entropy.
7
Recall that s = 0 for the entanglement entropy of the pure AdS geometry (SCFT ).

–3–
Figure 1. A schematically figure for σ in unit of s. The first law of entanglement entropy (FLEE)
implies σ/s ∼ ` at small `. In the large ` regime, the area theorem can be obeyed when σ/s → 1−
(blue line) or violated when σ/s → 1+ (red line).

Motivations of this paper : In summary, using σ (1.7), the `-dependence of holographic

entanglement entropy in the small/large subsystem limit can be expressed as
−1
(The first law of entanglement entropy) : σ = hTtt i Tent , (`  1)
A
(The area theorem) : σ = s − ∆α with ∆α ≥ 0 , (`  1)
V
(1.10)

−1
in which Tent ∼ ` and VA ∼ `−1 .8 Note that although σ basically has the same information
with ∆S because dividing by V is technically trivial, σ is a practically useful quantity in
that we can easily check the area theorem ∆α ≥ 0 by the naked eye: if σ → s− at `  1,
this implies ∆α ≥ 0. See Fig. 1.
Using (1.10), it is proposed [42] that σ may be used to characterize and classify the
states of matter (or geometries in holography). In particular, depending on if FLEE and/or
the area theorem is violated or not, various AdS black holes have been classified in [42]:
the AdS domain wall, the hyperscaling-violating black hole, the AdS soliton, the neutral
black hole, the charged black hole, the black hole with a broken translational symmetry.9
In this paper, using (1.10) we apply the analysis given in [42] to the case in which
symmetry is broken spontaneously. In particular, we consider the most well-studied sym-
metries for the strongly correlated systems in holography [83–86]: the U (1) symmetry and
the translational symmetry which can have applications to superconductors and charge
density waves, respectively.
Our goal is to examine if the obedience/violation of FLEE/area theorem in (1.10) can
also be used to classify the phases with spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e., we extend the
analysis in [42] to more realistic condensed matter phases in holography. Also, our work
can be complementary to the case with a broken translational symmetry in [42] in that
the translational symmetry was broken explicitly in [42], while it is broken spontaneously
in our paper.
8 −1 −1
Note that ∆E in (1.3) is V hTtt i. Thus, ∆S in (1.1) is V hTtt i Tent so that σ = hTtt i Tent .
9
See also [43] for the analysis of σ with the neutral black hole, [82] for σ in a large dimension limit.

–4–
 Note also that entanglement entropy for the superconducting phase (the U (1) symme-
try breaking) has been extensively investigated in holography [87–113]. However, to our
knowledge, our approach (FLEE/area theorem) with (1.10) has not been investigated yet
for holographic superconductors.
Moreover, even for the translational symmetry breaking, entanglement entropy has
only been studied with the explicit breaking case [30, 42, 114–120] and the analysis with
the spontaneous breaking is still missing. Thus, in this paper, the entanglement entropy
with spontaneously broken translational symmetry is analyzed for the first time.
It may also be important to make a further comment that the precise condition when
the area theorem is violated (∆α < 0) has not been fully understood yet. From the low
temperature analysis with the various black hole geometries in [42], it is argued that the
near-horizon geometry may be related to the area theorem violation: e.g., the black hole
with the AdS2 × R2 IR geometry could violate the area theorem. Thus, using spontaneous
symmetry breaking, we make one step further in this direction and attempt to have a more
complete understanding of the area theorem.
This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we review entanglement entropy in
holography and also introduce the useful quantity, σ, to examine (1.10). In section 3, using
the holographic superconductor model, we study the obedience/violation of the FLEE/area
theorem in which the U (1) symmetry is broken. In section 4, we study how the (explicitly or
spontaneously) broken translational symmetry can affect both FLEE and the area theorem
with the holographic axion model. Section 5 is devoted to conclusions.

2 Setup

In this section, we will review the holographic entanglement entropy in the asymptotically
AdS4 metric (2.1) and also introduce the entanglement density σ (1.7) in terms of the
function of the metric. Also, we further express σ in units of the thermal entropy density
s, σ/s, in order to make σ dimensionless. Such a quantity is useful not only because it is
dimensionless, but also for the convenient evaluation of (1.10) in numerics (in particular
for the area theorem, e.g., see Fig. 1).
Note that our metric (2.1) becomes the one in [42] when h(z) = 1. Thus, our analysis in
this section corresponds to the generalization of [42] to the case with more general metrics.

2.1 Holographic entanglement density

We consider the asymptotically AdS4 metric:

L2 dz 2
 
2 2 2 2
ds = 2 −f (z)dt + + h(z)(dx + dy ) , (2.1)
z g(z)

with an AdS radius L. The functions f (z), g(z) and h(z) in (2.1) are expanded near the
AdS boundary (z → 0) as
X X X
f (z) = 1 − fi z i , g(z) = 1 − gi z i , h(z) = 1 − hi z i , (2.2)
i=1 i=1 i=1

–5–
Figure 2. A strip entangling region with its minimal surface (red). The strip has width ` in the
x-direction and length Ω in the y-direction. z∗ is the largest z value of the minimal surface in the
bulk.

where fi , gi , ang hi are model dependent constants. From the holographic renormaliza-
tion [121, 122], the asymptotic of the metric (2.2) determines the energy density of the
dual field theory, hTtt i, as
L2
hTtt i = g3 , (2.3)
8πGN
where GN is Newton’s constant and g3 is from (2.2). Other thermodynamic variables of
the field theory, the temperature (T ) and the entropy density (s), can be read with the
metric (2.1) at the horizon zh :
s 
f 0 (z) L2 h(z) 

g(z) 
T = , s= . (2.4)
4π f (z)  4GN z 2 zh

zh

Holographic entanglement entropy S: One can study the entanglement entropy (S)
holographically via [1, 2, 123]

Amin
S= , (2.5)
4GN

where Amin is the area of the minimal surface in the bulk at a fixed t, which is anchored at
the AdS boundary. In this paper, we consider the strip entangling surface. See Fig. 2: the
minimal surface Amin is expressed as a red surface with the width of the strip ` in which
z∗ is the largest z value of the minimal surface in the bulk.

–6–
 With the metric (2.1), geometric quantities for (2.5), ` and Amin , can be obtained as
z∗
z2
Z
1
`= 2 dz pq ,
h(z)2
g(z) h(z) z4
0 z∗2 − h(z∗ )2 z∗4
Z z∗ s (2.6)
1 h(z)
Amin = 2L2 Ω dz q ,
 z 2 1 − z h(z∗ )
4 2 g(z)
z∗4 h(z)2

where the lower endpoint in Amin is a cutoff z =  dual to the UV divergence in holography.
In order to isolate the UV divergence, it may be useful to split the integrand of Amin
in (2.6) into two parts as
s  s 
Z z∗ Z z∗ Z z∗
1 h(z) dz dz  1 h(z)
dz q = + − 1 ,
z2 2
q
 z 2 1 − z h(z∗ )
4 2 g(z)  →0 z 1 − z h(z∗ )
4 2 g(z)
z∗4 h(z)2 z∗4 h(z)2
(2.7)

where the UV divergence can be easily evaluated from the first term and we can let  → 0
in the second integral since the second term is finite.
Using (2.7) with the change of variable u = z/z∗ , one can express the minimal surface
in (2.6) as
" s s !#
1
h(z∗ )2
Z
1 1 h(z∗ ) 1 du h(z∗ u)
Amin = 2L Ω2
− + 2
`+ 1 − u4 −1 ,
 z∗ 2 z∗ z∗ 0 u2 h(z∗ u)2 g(z∗ u)
(2.8)

with the strip width

1
u2
Z
1
` = 2z∗ du q p . (2.9)
h(z∗ u)2 g(z∗ u) h(z∗ u)
0
h(z∗ )2
− u4

Then, collecting 1/z∗ terms in (2.8), one can find the entanglement entropy (2.5) as

L2 Ω
 
1 h(z∗ ) C(z∗ )
S= + `+ , (2.10)
2GN  2 z∗2 z∗

with the dimensionless coefficient

s s !
1
h(z∗ )2
Z
du h(z∗ u)
C(z∗ ) := −1 + 1 − u4 −1 . (2.11)
0 u2 h(z∗ u)2 g(z∗ u)

Note that both (2.9) and (2.11) can be solved analytically for the case of g(z∗ u) = h(z∗ u) =

–7–
1, which produces the entanglement entropy of the pure AdS geometry, SCF T , as
 !2 
2 3
L Ω  1 2π Γ( 4 ) 
SCFT = − . (2.12)
2GN  ` Γ( 14 )

Holographic entanglement density σ: Using (2.10)-(2.12), the entanglement density

(σ) (1.7) is defined as
 !2 
2 3
S − SCFT L  h(z∗ ) C(z∗ ) 2 4π Γ( 4 )
σ := = + + 2 , (2.13)
V 4GN z∗2 z∗ ` ` Γ( 41 )

where the UV divergence is canceled out. V is the volume of the entangling region10 , defined
as V := ` Ω, thus σ in (2.13) may specify the “density” of the entanglement entropy.
The entanglement density (2.13) is valid for any `(z∗ ) via (2.9). Since the minimal
surface cannot penetrate the horizon, one can notice that `(z∗ ) is evaluated in the range
0 < z∗ < zh . As explained in the introduction, the entanglement entropy can exhibit
interesting features (FLEE and the area theorem) (1.10) in the small or large entangling
region that can be obtained as
(
z∗ /zh → 0 : Small entangling region (`˜  1) ,
(2.14)
z∗ /zh → 1 : Large entangling region (`˜  1) ,

where `˜ := `/zh defined in (2.19).

The first law of entanglement entropy (FLEE): For `˜  1, one may expand the
integrand in (2.11) in the small z∗ /zh expansion and integrate it order-by-order, so that
(2.13) could also be expanded in powers of `˜ via (2.9).11 Then, if the geometries allow
FLEE, σ will be expressed as

−1
σ = hTtt i Tent + ... , (2.15)

where hTtt i is (2.3), and Tent (1.3). In the following section, we will explicitly perform the
small z∗ /zh analysis when the black holes allow an analytic background geometry.

The area theorem: For `˜  1, z∗ → zh , σ in (2.13) becomes

s zh C(zh ) 2 A
σ = s+ + . . . = s − ∆α + ... , (2.16)
h(zh ) ` V

where we used s (2.4) and A/V = 2/`. We also identify

s zh C(zh )
∆α = − , (2.17)
h(zh )
10
For AdSd>4 , V is the volume for higher dimensions [42, 43, 82].
11 ˜
We also expand the integrand in ` of (2.9) in small z∗ /zh and change the variable from z∗ /zh to `.

–8–
which can be used for the area theorem violation: C(zh ) > 0 (i.e., ∆α < 0).12

2.2 Dimensionless entanglement density: σ/s

Note that σ in (2.13) has a O(1/`2 ) dimension. In [42, 43], in order to render σ dimensionless,
s (2.4) has been used as a scaling parameter giving
!2
σ 1 h(z̃∗ ) C(z̃∗ ) 2 4π Γ( 43 )
= 2 + + , (2.18)
s z̃∗ h(1) ˜ ˜
z̃∗ h(1) ` ` h(1)
2 Γ( 41 )

where tilde variables are defined as

1
u2
Z
z∗ ` 1
z̃∗ := , `˜ := = 2z̃∗ du q p , (2.19)
zh zh 0 h(z∗ u)2
− u4 g(z∗ u) h(z∗ u)
h(z∗ )2

with ` (2.9). Note that the argument for h(zh ) and C(z∗ ) have also been scaled with zh as
h(1) and C(z̃∗ ), respectively. Therefore, for the given metric (2.1), one can study σ/s via
(2.18) once both C(z̃∗ ) (2.11) and `˜ (2.19) are evaluated.
In terms of σ/s, FLEE (2.15) can be expressed as

1

!2
σ Γ 4
g̃3 ˜
FLEE: = 3 ` + ... , (2.20)
s Γ 4
32 h(1)

where we used (1.3) for Tent , (2.3) for hTtt i, and (2.4) for s. We also define g̃3 := g3 zh3 .
One may also choose a different scaling parameter to make σ dimensionless, however, s is
useful for our purpose: to check the area theorem, i.e., (2.18) at `˜  1 (or z̃∗ → 1)

σ C(1) 2
Area theorem: = 1+ + ... , (2.21)
s h(1) `˜

where the area theorem is violated when C(1) > 0.

In what follows, using holographic superconductor models and holographic axion mod-
els, we will study if FLEE (2.20) and/or the area theorem (2.21) is violated or not when
the U (1) symmetry is broken in section 3, and when the translational symmetry is broken
in section 4.
12
Note that h(zh ) ≥ 0 if s ≥ 0 (2.4).

–9–
3 Broken U (1) symmetry

3.1 The model

We study a holographic superconductor model based on Einstein-Maxwell theory [124,
125]13 :

√
Z
S = S1 + S2 = d4 x −g (L1 + L2 ) ,
(3.1)
1 2
L1 = R + 6 − F , L2 = −|DΦ| − M |Φ| ,
2 2 2
4
where we set units such that the gravitational constant 16πG = 1 and the AdS radius
L = 1 for simplicity. The action (3.1) consists of two actions. S1 is the Einstein-Maxwell
theory composed of two fields: the metric gµν , a U (1) gauge field Aµ with field strength
F = dA. The second action S2 is for the superconducting phase, constructed by a complex
scalar field Φ with the covariant derivative Dµ Φ = (∇µ − iqAµ ) Φ. For numerics, we set
q = 3 in this paper.
In order to study the action (3.1), we take the following ansatz for numerical conve-
nience
 
2
 
1 z dz
ds2 = 2 − 1 − U (z)e−S(z) dt2 +   + dx2 + dy 2  ,
z zh z
1 − zh U (z) (3.2)
 
z
A= 1− a(z)dt , Φ = z ∆− η(z) ,
zh

where zh is the horizon and the AdS boundary is at z = 0. Comparing (2.1) with (3.2),
one can find that
   
z −S(z) z
f (z) = 1 − U (z)e , g(z) = 1 − U (z) , h(z) = 1 , (3.3)
zh zh

and the energy density (hTtt i), the temperature (T ), and the entropy density (s) for the
action (3.1) can be computed via (2.2)-(2.4).
In order for the bulk geometry asymptotic to the AdS spacetime near the boundary
(z = 0), we impose the boundary condition for the metric as U (0) = 1, S(0) = 0. It also
turns out that the boundary behavior of the matter fields At , Φ is

At = µ − ρ z + . . . , Φ = Φ(−) z ∆− + Φ(+) z ∆+ + . . . , (3.4)

q
3 9
where ∆± = 2 ± 4 + M 2 . According to the holographic dictionary, µ is interpreted as
the chemical potential and ρ is the charge density. In the asymptotic form of Φ, Φ(−) is the
source and Φ+ is the condensate. Then, as the boundary condition for the superconducting
phase, we set the source to be zero, Φ(−) = 0, to describe the spontaneous symmetry
13
For the recent development of holographic superconductors, we refer the reader to [126–131] and refer-
ences therein.

– 10 –
breaking. Thus, one can have a superconducting phase with Φ(+) 6= 0 and a normal phase
with Φ = 0. Note that, from the ansatz (3.2), one can easily read off the chemical potential
µ via µ = a(0) and the source Φ(−) via Φ(−) = η(0).

3.2 Normal phase: a review

Let us first review the normal phase (Φ = 0) [42], S = S1 in (3.1). In the normal phase,
one can find the analytic solution as

z z 2 µ2 z 3
U (z) = 1 + + 2− , S(z) = 0, a(z) = µ, η(z) = 0 , (3.5)
zh zh 4 zh

which corresponds to

µ2 µ2 zh2
 
1
f (z) = g(z) = 1 − g3 z + 2 z 4 ,
3
g3 = 3 1+ , (3.6)
4zh zh 4

via (3.3). Note that the same notation g3 in (2.2) is used here. The temperature T (2.4)
reads

3 µ2 z h
T = − . (3.7)
4πzh 16π

The entanglement density for normal phase: In order to evaluate (2.18), we need
to identify g(z∗ u) as

µ̃2 4 4
g(z∗ u) = 1 − g̃3 z̃∗3 u3 + z̃ u , (3.8)
4 ∗

which is the only input function for both C(z̃∗ ) in (2.11) and `˜ in (2.19). In (3.8), we also
used g̃3 := g3 zh3 , µ̃ := µ zh .
We want to fix the chemical potential for the normal phase, so σ/s should be expressed
in terms of ` and T at fixed µ: i.e., (` µ, T /µ). For this purpose, we can use

µ̃2
 
T 1
` µ = `˜µ̃ , = 3− , (3.9)
µ 4π µ̃ 4

where `˜ := `/zh (2.19) and T from (3.7). Note that once (3.8) is being used, σ/s (2.18)
˜ µ̃) via (2.19).
can be a function of (z̃∗ , µ̃) which can be expressed further in terms of (`,
Furthermore, solving the relations (3.9) we can find the expression of (`, ˜ µ̃) in terms of
(` µ, T /µ). Thus, using (3.9), σ/s (2.18) can be evaluated at given (` µ, T /µ).
At given (` µ, T /µ), we investigate σ/s for the normal phase and found that

Normal phase: FLEE is obeyed, Area theorem is violated at low T , (3.10)

which can be seen in Fig. 3. In Fig. 3(a), we display σ/s with different T /µ = (0.16, 0.01, 0)
(red, green, blue). One can find that FLEE (2.20) is obeyed for all T : σ ∼ ` at low `, e.g,
see the blue dashed line (T /µ = 0 case) in Fig. 3(a).

– 11 –
 ��� ���
● 0.05 ●
��� ���
0
��� - ���
σ ● -0.05
�(�) - ���
� ��� 1.005
-0.1

��� 1. - ��� 0 0.0005 0.001

���
0.995 - ��� ●
0.99
��� 0 100 200 - ���
� � � � � �� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����
ℓμ �/μ
(a) σ/s vs ` µ (b) C(1) vs T /µ

Figure 3. Entanglement density of the normal phase. Left: σ/s (solid lines) at T /µ = (0.16, 0.01, 0)
(red, green, blue). Black dotted line is a guide line for σ/s = 1 and the blue dashed line is (3.14).
The inset shows the large ` µ behavior. Right: C(1) (dashed line). Dots correspond to data used
in Fig. 3(a). The inset shows the low T /µ behavior: C(1) > 0 at low T .

For the area theorem (2.21), we need to study the large ` behavior. From the inset in
Fig. 3(a), one can see that the area theorem is violated at low T : e.g., σ/s → 1+ for the
T /µ = 0 case (the blue solid line). The violation of the area theorem can also be easily
checked by C(1) > 0 at low T in Fig. 3(b).

FLEE of the charged black holes: We close this subsection with the analysis on
how to obtain (2.20) for the charge black hole S = S1 in (3.1). Our analytic result is
complementary to the numerical results in [42].14
In order to study FLEE, we need to consider the `˜  1 limit or equivalently z̃∗ → 0
limit in (3.8). First, for `˜ (2.19), one can find its leading behavior by considering g(z∗ u) = 1
as

√ Γ 43


`˜ = 2 π
z̃∗ + . . . . (3.11)
Γ 41

Moreover, it is useful to express C (2.11) up to its sub-leading order by considering g(z∗ u) =

1 − g̃3 z̃∗3 u3 in (3.8), which is
√ 7


2 πΓ π
C(z̃∗ ) = − 4

5 + g̃3 z̃∗3 + . . . . (3.12)
3 Γ 4
16

Then, using (3.11), σ/s (2.18) can be expressed as

" #
3 Γ 54


σ 1
= 2 2+ √
C(z̃∗ ) + . . . , (3.13)
s z̃∗ π Γ 47

where the constant 2 in (3.13) comes from the combination between the first and third
14
One can find the neutral case in [43].

– 12 –
 �� ���
●
��
� ��� ●

σ
� �(�)
� - ���
� ●

� - ���
�
� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ���
ℓμ � / ��
(a) σ/s vs ` µ (b) C(1) vs T /Tc

Figure 4. Entanglement density of the superconducting phase at M 2 = 0. (For M 2 > 0 we obtained

qualitatively the same plots.) Left: σ/s (solid lines) at T /Tc = (1, 0.23, 0.16) (red, green, blue).
The black dotted line is the guide line for σ/s = 1 and the blue dashed line is (2.20). Right: C(1)
for the superconducting phase (solid line), the normal phase (dashed line). Dots correspond to data
used in Fig. 4(a).

terms in (2.18).15 Moreover, plugging C (3.12) into (3.13), the constant term in (3.13), 2,
√
Γ( 7 )
will be eliminated by the leading term of C in (3.12), −23 π Γ 54 . Then σ/s can show FLEE
(4)
(2.20) by the sub-leading term of C in (3.12) as
√ 5

1

!2 1

!2
σ 3 π Γ 4
Γ 4
g̃3 ˜ Γ 4
g̃3
= 7 g̃3 z̃∗ = 3 ` = 3 (` µ) , (3.14)
s 16 Γ 4 Γ 4
32 Γ 4
32 µ̃

where we used (3.11) in the second equality and ` µ = `˜µ̃ (3.9) in the last equality.

3.3 Superconducting phase

Next, let us study σ/s (2.18) of the superconducting phase (Φ 6= 0), S = S1 + S2 in (3.1).
Solving equations of motion from (3.1), one can find the numerical solutions g(z∗ u) for
T < Tc where Tc could be identified by the temperature at which the condensate Φ(+)
starts to be finite. Then, with numerical solutions, one can evaluate C(z̃∗ ) in (2.11), `˜ in
(2.19) so that σ/s in (2.18) for the superconducting phase.
In particular, we make the plot of σ/s for two cases: i) M 2 = 0 in Fig. 4; ii) M 2 = −2 in
Fig. 5 in order to examine the mass (M 2 ) dependence of σ/s.16 These are the representative
examples for M 2 ≥ 0 and M 2 < 0, respectively.17

The entanglement density for the superconducting phase: For M 2 ≥ 0, we found

that σ/s for superconductors is qualitatively similar to the normal phase (3.10), i.e., FLEE
15
Recall that h(z) = 1 in (3.3).
16
See also [132] for the M 2 dependence of another quantum information quantity: the holographic com-
plexity.
17
We also checked the M 2 = 2 case. However, the result of M 2 = 2 is qualitatively the same as M 2 = 0.

– 13 –
 ��� ���
���
���
- ���
σ ��� - ���
�(�) - ���
� ���
- ��� ●

��� - ��� ●
- ��� ●
- ���
� � � � � �� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ���
ℓμ � / ��
(a) σ/s vs ` µ (b) C(1) vs T /Tc

Figure 5. Entanglement density of the superconducting phase at M 2 = −2. Left: σ/s (solid lines)
at T /Tc = (1, 0.3, 0.2) (red, green, blue). The black dotted line is the guide line for σ/s = 1 and
the blue dashed line is (2.20). Right: C(1) for the superconducting phase (solid line), the normal
phase (dashed line). Dots correspond to data used in Fig. 5(a).

is obeyed (see Fig. 4(a)), while the area theorem is violated at low T (see Fig. 4(b)).18
On the other hand, the M 2 < 0 case produces the different result from the M 2 ≥ 0
case: both FLEE and the area theorem are obeyed. For FLEE, see Fig. 5(a) in which σ ∼ `
at low ` for all T < Tc . For the area theorem, see Fig. 5(b): C(1) for superconducting phase
(solid line) may always be negative, indicating the area theorem is obeyed for all T < Tc .
Note that C(1) for the superconducting phase in Fig. 5(b) does not reach to T /Tc = 0
because of the instability in our numerics. However, from the large ` µ behavior of σ/s
in Fig. 5(a), it may be expected that the area theorem for the superconducting phase is
obeyed even at lower T /Tc because, in the large ` µ regime, the value of σ/s is smaller at
lower T , e.g., at ` µ = 10, σ/s is decreasing from 0.8 (T /Tc = 1, red) to −0.2 (T /Tc = 0.2,
blue). This implies that C(1) in (2.21) is decreasing as T is lowered, which is consistent
with Fig. 5(b). Thus, σ/s may be approaching 1− for all T < Tc .
In summary, for holographic superconductors, the obedience/violation of FLEE/area
theorem depends on the sign of M 2 :

Superconducting phase with M 2 ≥ 0 : FLEE is obeyed, Area theorem is violated at small T ,

Superconducting phase with M 2 < 0 : FLEE is obeyed, Area theorem is obeyed .
(3.15)

If the area theorem were obeyed in the superconducting phase, the violation of the area
theorem would have played the role of distinguishing the normal phase from the super-
conducting phase. However, this is not the case. Instead, it seems that the violation of
the area theorem may classify the superconducting phases: one class with M 2 ≥ 0 and
the other with M 2 < 0. Noting that M 2 is related to the material properties such as the
Note that (2.20) for the superconducting phase can be evaluated with `˜ = ` µ/µ̃ (3.9) with g̃3 from
18

the numerical solution of g(z) (2.2) and µ̃ from a(0) (3.2). Note also that we set zh = 1 for numerics, thus
µ = µ̃ and g3 = g̃3 .

– 14 –
 U(1) symmetry FLEE Area theorem
Normal phase Obeyed Violated
Superconducting phase
Obeyed Violated
(M 2 ≥ 0)
Superconducting phase
Obeyed Obeyed
(M 2 < 0)

Table 1. FLEE/area theorem with broken U (1) symmetry. The area theorem is violated at low T .

critical temperature Tc in condensed matter systems we may say M 2 can identify different
superconducting materials.
For a summary of FLEE/area theorem, see Table. 1.

4 Broken translational symmetry

4.1 The model

We consider the Einstein-Maxwell-Axion model [133] as

4 √
Z  
1 2 N
S = d x −g R + 6 − F − X , (4.1)
4

which is constructed with S1 in (3.1) by adding an additional scalar field ϕi called the
axion field
2
1X
X := (∂ϕi )2 , ϕi = m xi , (4.2)
2
i=1

where m denotes the strength of the translational symmetry breaking.

The action (4.1) allows analytic background solutions as
 
2 1 2 1 2 2
ds = 2 −f (z) dt + dz + d~x , A = At (z) dt , (4.3)
z g(z)

with

µ2 m2N
 
z
f (z) = g(z) = 1 − g3 z + 2 z 4 +
3
z 2N , At (z) = µ 1 − , (4.4)
4zh 2(2N − 3) zh

where it becomes (3.6) at m = 0 and g3 is determined by f (zh ) = 0 as

µ2 zh2 m2N zh2N

 
1
g3 = 3 1+ + , (4.5)
zh 4 2(2N − 3)

and the temperature T (2.4) is

3 µ2 zh m2N zh2N −1
T = − − . (4.6)
4πzh 16π 8π

– 15 –
Translational symmetry breaking in holography: The holographic model (4.1) has
been used to study various translational symmetry breaking patterns: explicitly broken
translational invariance (EXB), spontaneously broken translational invariance (SSB).
Solving the equations of motion near the AdS boundary (z → 0), one can check that
the power of the potential in (4.1), N , determines the boundary behavior of the axion
field19

(0) (1)
ϕi = ϕi + ϕi z 5−2N + . . . , (4.7)

(0)
where ϕi = m xi corresponds to the bulk solution (4.2). According to the holographic
dictionary, the leading term can be interpreted as the source and the sub-leading term is
(0)
for the vacuum expectation value (vev). Thus, when N < 5/2, ϕi is the source so that the
(0)
translational symmetry is broken explicitly, via ϕi = m xi . On the other hand, when N >
(0)
5/2, ϕi is no longer the source, instead it is the vev so one can study the spontaneously
(1)
broken translational symmetry by taking ϕi = 0 with N > 5/2. In summary, using the
action (4.1), one can study the broken translational symmetry in holography as
(
N < 5/2 : Explicitly broken translational symmetry (EXB) ,
(4.8)
N > 5/2 : Spontaneously broken translational symmetry (SSB) .

The entanglement density with broken translational symmetry. In what follows,

we study σ/s (2.18) with various values of N . For this purpose, we identify g(z∗ u) from
(4.4) as

µ̃2 4 4 m̃2N
g(z∗ u) = 1 − g̃3 z̃∗3 u3 + z̃∗ u + z̃ 2N u2N , (4.9)
4 2(2N − 3) ∗

where we used g̃3 := g3 zh3 , µ̃ := µ zh , and m̃ := m zh . Moreover, a similar relation as in

(3.9) can also be used at finite m
"  2N #
T 1 µ̃ 2 µ̃ 2N m
` µ = `˜µ̃ , = 3− − , (4.10)
µ 4π µ̃ 4 2 µ

˜ µ̃)
where T is from (4.6). Solving the relations (4.10) one can find the expression of (`,
in terms of (` µ, T /µ, m/µ, N ). Thus, σ/s in (2.18) can be evaluated as a function of
(` µ, T /µ) at given (m/µ, N ).

4.2 First law of entanglement entropy

Considering the z̃∗ → 0 limit, let us first discuss FLEE (2.20) for general N . For easy
comparison with the normal phase (m = 0), we follow similar analysis as given in (3.11)-
(3.14).
19
See also [134] for the description of the translational symmetry breaking with more general holographic
models.

– 16 –
 From the leading term of (4.9), g(z∗ u) = 1, one can find the expression for small `˜
as (3.11). Next, as in (3.12), we also need to express C(z̃∗ ) by considering g(z∗ u) up to
its sub-leading order. However, as can be seen from (4.9), the sub-leading term of g(z∗ u)
depends on N as

m̃2N
(
N < 3/2 : g(z∗ u) =1 + 2N 2N
2(2N −3) z̃∗ u + ... ,
(4.11)
N > 3/2 : g(z∗ u) =1 − g̃3 z̃∗3 u3 + . . . ,

where . . . denotes higher order terms.20 For the N > 3/2 case, we have the same sub-leading
term of the normal phase (m = 0) so that FLEE is obeyed at N > 3/2 as (3.14).

The violation of FLEE at N < 3/2: However, for the N < 3/2 case, we need to
m̃2N 2N 2N ,
compute C(z̃∗ ) (2.11) with the different sub-leading term, g(z∗ u) = 1 + 2(2N −3) z̃∗ u
which produces
√ √
2 π Γ 74 Γ N2 − 14



π
C(z̃∗ ) = −
+
m̃2N z̃∗2N . (4.12)
3 Γ 54 32(3 − 2N ) Γ N2 + 54

Then, plugging (4.12) into (3.13), σ/s can be further expressed as

5 N 1
m 2N 2N 2N −2



−

σ 3 Γ 4 Γ 2 4
= 7

N 5

µ̃ z̃∗ ,
s 32(3 − 2N ) Γ 4 Γ 2 + 4
µ
5 N √
!2−2N  2N
(4.13)
− 14 2 π Γ 43



3 Γ Γ m
= 4
7

2
N 5

1

µ̃2 (` µ)2N −2 ,
32(3 − 2N ) Γ 4 Γ 2 +4 Γ 4
µ
| {z }
:= C

where the sub-leading correction in (4.12) only survives for the same reason explained
above (3.14). In (4.13), we also used m̃ = m µ µ̃ in the first equality and (3.11), (4.10) in the
last equality.
One can also find the higher order corrections to (4.13) by considering g(z∗ u) up to the
m̃2N
O z̃∗ order, g(z∗ u) = 1 + 2(2N
3 2N 2N − g̃ z̃ 3 u3 , which gives (3.14) as a correction,


−3) z̃∗ u 3 ∗
i.e.,

1

!2
σ Γ g̃3
= C (` µ)2N −2 + 4

3 (` µ) + . . . , (4.14)
s Γ 4
32 µ̃

where the leading term is (4.13). Therefore, for N < 3/2, one can notice that FLEE is
violated due to the leading term (4.13): σ/s ∼ (` µ)2N −2 < 1 . Note that when N = 1 our
result (4.14) reproduces [42] in which the leading term (4.13) becomes a constant C.
Based on the analysis (4.11)-(4.14), we find the violation of FLEE depending on the
20
Note that the model (4.1) may not be well defined at N = 3/2, e.g., see (4.5).

– 17 –
 ��� ���

��� ���
σ σ
��� ���
� �

��� ���

��� ���
� � � � � �� � � � � � ��
ℓμ ℓμ
(a) σ/s vs ` µ at N = 1 (EXB) (b) σ/s vs ` µ at N = 3 (SSB)

Figure 6. Entanglement density at T /µ = 0, m/µ = (2, 1, 0.5, 0) (red, orange, green, blue). The
black dotted line is the guide line for σ/s = 1. Solid lines are numerical results σ/s via (2.18),
dashed lines are analytic results: (4.14) in Fig. 6(a), (3.14) in Fig. 6(b). Note that the m/µ = 0 case
corresponds to the blue data in Fig. 3(a).

symmetry breaking pattern (4.8) as

(
FLEE is violated (N < 3/2) ,
EXB :
FLEE is obeyed (3/2 < N < 5/2) , (4.15)
SSB : FLEE is obeyed (N > 5/2) .

Note that our result (4.15) is complementary to the previous work [42] (N = 1 case), and
shows that EXB does not guarantee the violation of FLEE, e.g., 3/2 < N < 5/2.
In Fig. 6, we make the representative plots of σ/s for FLEE with different symmetry
breaking patterns, N = 1 (EXB) in Fig. 6(a) and N = 3 (SSB) in Fig. 6(b), in order to
show that our analytic result is consistent with the numerical result of σ/s.21

4.3 Area theorem

Next, let us study C(1) to check the area theorem (2.21). Note that, unlike the analysis
for FLEE, we should resort to numerics in order for checking the area theorem [42].
In particular, we examine the area theorem by the sign of C(1) at T = 0 as in the
normal phase (m/µ = 0) in Fig. 3(b).22 In other words, we study how the blue dot in in
Fig. 3(b) behaves when we increase m/µ at given N . See Fig. 7.
In Fig. 7(a), we found that the translational symmetry breaking, a finite m/µ, can
change the sign of C(1). For instance, at N = 3 (the red line in Fig. 7(a)), one can see that
the positive value (blue dot) of C(1) can become negative as we increase m/µ. Here we
21
Note that our analytic analysis is valid for all T .
22
In all holographic models in this paper, we checked that C(1) has the monotonic behavior with respect
to T (e.g., Fig. 3-5). We also checked that C(1) at finite m/µ has a monotonic behavior for T as well, which
is similar to Fig. 3. Thus the T = 0 analysis of C(1) may be enough to check the violation of the area
theorem.

– 18 –
 ���
��� 1
0.8
��� 0.6
��� 0.4 ★
★
●
�� ��� 0.2
�(�) ��� ★ ★ 0
2 4 6 8 10
μ ��� ★
-��� ★
���
-���
���
��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ���
�/μ 
(a) C(1) vs m/µ at N = (3, 2.3, 2.1, 1.6) (red, (b) mc /µ vs N
orange, dashed black, green)

Figure 7. Checking the area theorem at T = 0 with m/µ. Blue dot in Fig. 7(a) is the same as in
Fig. 3(b). The stars represent mc /µ and the black dashed lines are the data at Ncri .

denote the critical value of m/µ giving C(1) = 0 as mc /µ: i.e., the area theorem is violated
(C(1) > 0) at m < mc .23
From Fig. 7(a), one can also find that mc /µ (stars) depends on the value of N , i.e.,
mc = mc (N ). In particular, mc /µ tends to increase as we decrease N , e.g., from N = 3
(red star) to N = 2.3 (orange star). As we decrease the value of N further, one can find
the critical N , Ncri , at which C(1) is always non-negative (black dashed line). Here we
numerically found Ncri ∼ 2.1. This N -dependent behavior of mc /µ can be seen clearly in
Fig. 7(b).
From all the figures in Fig. 7, we find the condition for the violation of the area theorem,
C(1) > 0, depending on the symmetry breaking pattern (4.8) as
(
C(1) > 0 at any m (N < Ncri ) ,
EXB :
C(1) > 0 at m < mc (N ) (Ncri < N < 5/2) ,
( (4.16)
C(1) > 0 at m < mc (N ) (5/2 < N < 5) ,
SSB :
C(1) > 0 at m < mc (N & 5) ,

where Ncri ∼ 2.1.24 Note that at N > Ncri ∼ 2.1, mc is a function of N in general as can
be seen in Fig. 7(b). However, we found that mc can be an N -independent universal value,
mc /µ ∼ 0.27, at N & 5, which corresponds to the last line in (4.16). See the inset of Fig.
7(b).
Based on (4.15) together with (4.16), we construct the summary table of the obe-
dience/violation of FLEE/area theorem in the presence of the translational symmetry
breaking. See Table. 2. As in the U(1) symmetry breaking in Table. 1, we find that the
obedience/violation of FLEE/area theorem may also be used to classify the phases in which
23
In Fig. 7(a), the red/orange star represents mc /µ.
24
One can easily check the first line of (4.16) in Fig. 7(a): at N < Ncri , i.e., from a dashed black towards
a green, C(1) > 0 at any m/µ.

– 19 –
 Translational symmetry FLEE Area theorem
Explicit breaking
Violated Violated at any m
(N < 3/2)
Explicit breaking
Obeyed Violated at any m
(3/2 < N < Ncri )
Explicit breaking
Obeyed Violated at m < mc (N )
(Ncri < N < 5/2)
Spontaneous breaking
Obeyed Violated at m < mc (N )
(5/2 < N < 5)
Spontaneous breaking
Obeyed Violated at m < mc
(N & 5)

Table 2. FLEE/area theorem with broken translation symmetry. The violation of the area theorem
is examined at T = 0 and we find Ncri ∼ 2.1.

translational invariance is broken spontaneously. We also found the universality at N & 5

with the N -independent mc . Note that, like M 2 in holographic superconductors, for the
SSB, N can also be closely related to the material properties such as the shear modulus,
G(N ), [133].

Further comments on the violation of the area theorem: It is argued [42] that the
violation of the area theorem at low T may be related to the IR geometry of black holes.
For instance, the black hole with the AdS2 × R2 IR geometry [42] turns out to violate the
area theorem, i.e., C(1) > 0. However, our result (4.16) may be one counter example for
this argument because one can find that the area theorem can be obeyed (C(1) < 0) at
m > mc for the black hole (4.1) in which its IR geometry is the AdS2 × R2 [135].25

Entanglement entropy and Goldstone modes in holography: As mentioned in

the introduction, entanglement entropy may have an NG log(`/) contribution from the
Goldstone mode [13, 136, 137] where NG is the number of Goldstone modes.26 Let us close
this section with a discussion for the appearance of such a log contribution in holography.
For SSB (N > 5/2) (4.8), it is shown that there can be (transverse/longitudinal)
phonons, the Goldstone modes of the translational symmetry, in holography [133]. Thus,
it will be instructive to see if SSB in holography can also show the log term in the entan-
glement entropy.
Note that the log term comes with the cutoff divergence, log , so that we may need to
investigate the UV-divergence structure in (2.7), which can be analysed by the expansion
of the integrand near the AdS boundary (z → 0) as
s
z∗ z∗
h0 (0) − g 0 (0)
Z Z  
1 h(z) 1
dz q = dz 2 + + ... . (4.17)
 z2 1− z 4 h(z∗ )2 g(z)  z 2z
z∗4 h(z)2

25
See the appendix in [135], showing that the action (4.1) has the AdS2 × R2 IR geometry.
26
Entanglement entropy has been investigated for coplanar antiferromagnets with SO(3) symmetry in
[13, 136], the spin-1/2 XY model [137].

– 20 –
One can see that the leading term in (4.17) produces the usual UV divergence term 1/ and
there can be an additional log divergence from the sub-leading term as (g 0 (0) − h0 (0)) log 
which is our interest.
However, for SSB (N > 5/2), it turns out such a log term in the holographic model
(4.1) is vanishing in that g(z) does not include a linear order in z (4.4) with h(z) = 1, so
g 0 (0) − h0 (0) = 0. Thus, based on this result, we speculate that the log contribution of the
entanglement entropy from the Goldstone mode may not appear in the strongly correlated
systems.

5 Conclusions

We have studied entanglement entropy with the spontaneously broken symmetry in holog-
raphy. In particular, using entanglement density (1.7) in the small and large subsystem
region, we examine if the obedience/violation of FLEE/area theorem (1.10) can classify
the phases in which the U (1) or translational symmetry is broken.
This kind of classification has been done for explicit-symmetry-breaking cases in [42]
and we extend it to spontaneous-symmetry-breaking cases. We show that indeed the obe-
dience/violation of FLEE/area theorem may characterize the phases where the U (1) or the
translational symmetry is broken spontaneously. For the summary see Table. 1 or Table.
2, where M 2 and N may be related to the physical properties of materials such as Tc or
the shear modulus respectively.
Furthermore, we find some universalities from the classification. First, FLEE is always
obeyed with the spontaneous symmetry breaking regardless of the type of symmetry: U (1)
or translational. Second, independent of translational symmetry breaking patterns (EXB
or SSB), the area theorem is always violated when the translational symmetry is weakly
broken (small m/µ). Third, for SSB, in particular N & 5, the area theorem may not be
related to the material properties (i.e., independent of N ).
As a byproduct, we find that the violation of the area theorem may not be related to
the IR geometry unlike the speculation in [42]. At first we speculated that the condition for
the violation of the area theorem may have something to do with the symmetry breaking
but we found it was not the case. Understanding the precise condition for the violation
of the area theorem remains an open problem and requires further investigation. We also
argue that the log contribution of the entanglement entropy from the Goldstone mode may
not appear in strongly correlated systems.
Although the obedience/violation of the FLEE/area theorem can classify phases fur-
ther within the spontaneously symmetry broken phase, it may not detect the phase transi-
tion between symmetry broken/unbroken phases (e.g., the normal phase vs the supercon-
ducting phase with M 2 ≥ 0) or the symmetry breaking patterns (e.g., EXB at Ncri < N <
5/2 vs SSB at 5/2 < N < 5).
Based on this work, it will be interesting to investigate other quantum information
properties, in the presence of spontaneous symmetry breaking, such as mutual information,
entanglement wedge cross section, complexity [138], and the entanglement entropy of the

– 21 –
Hawking radiation, i.e., the Page curve.27 We leave this subject as future work and will
address them in the near future.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Sang-Eon Bak, Wen-Bin Pan, Yuan-Tai Wang for valuable discus-
sions and correspondence. This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of
China (Grant No. 2018FYA0305800), Project 12035016 supported by National Natural Sci-
ence Foundation of China, the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of
Sciences, Grant No. XDB28000000, Basic Science Research Program through the National
Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future
Planning (NRF- 2021R1A2C1006791) and GIST Research Institute(GRI) grant funded by
the GIST in 2022.

References

[1] S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 181602, [hep-th/0603001].
[2] S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Aspects of Holographic Entanglement Entropy, JHEP 08 (2006)
045, [hep-th/0605073].
[3] J. M. Maldacena, The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,
Adv.Theor.Math.Phys. 2 (1998) 231–252, [hep-th/9711200].
[4] E. Witten, Anti-de Sitter space and holography, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253–291,
[hep-th/9802150].
[5] S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, Gauge theory correlators from
non-critical string theory, Phys. Lett. B428 (1998) 105–114, [hep-th/9802109].
[6] T. Nishioka, S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Holographic Entanglement Entropy: An Overview,
J. Phys. A42 (2009) 504008, [0905.0932].
[7] M. Van Raamsdonk, Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement, Gen. Rel. Grav. 42
(2010) 2323–2329, [1005.3035].
[8] M. Nozaki, S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Holographic Geometry of Entanglement
Renormalization in Quantum Field Theories, JHEP 10 (2012) 193, [1208.3469].
[9] J. Lin, M. Marcolli, H. Ooguri and B. Stoica, Locality of Gravitational Systems from
Entanglement of Conformal Field Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 221601,
[1412.1879].
[10] P. Hayden, S. Nezami, X.-L. Qi, N. Thomas, M. Walter and Z. Yang, Holographic duality
from random tensor networks, JHEP 11 (2016) 009, [1601.01694].
[11] N. Laflorencie, Quantum entanglement in condensed matter systems, Phys. Rept. 646
(2016) 1–59, [1512.03388].
[12] P. Zhang, Quantum Entanglement in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model and its Generalizations,
2203.01513.
27
See [139, 140] for a recent review of quantum information in holography.

– 22 –
[13] M. A. Metlitski and T. Grover, Entanglement Entropy of Systems with Spontaneously
Broken Continuous Symmetry, 1112.5166.
[14] M. M. Wolf, Violation of the entropic area law for Fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006)
010404, [quant-ph/0503219].
[15] D. Gioev and I. Klich, Entanglement Entropy of Fermions in Any Dimension and the
Widom Conjecture, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 100503, [quant-ph/0504151].
[16] B. Swingle, Entanglement Entropy and the Fermi Surface, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010)
050502, [0908.1724].
[17] B. Swingle, Conformal Field Theory on the Fermi Surface, Phys. Rev. B 86 (2012) 035116,
[1002.4635].
[18] A. Kitaev and J. Preskill, Topological entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006)
110404, [hep-th/0510092].
[19] M. Levin and X.-G. Wen, Detecting Topological Order in a Ground State Wave Function,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 110405, [cond-mat/0510613].
[20] C. Castelnovo and C. Chamon, Topological order in a three-dimensional toric code at finite
temperature, Physical Review B 78 (oct, 2008) .
[21] T. Grover, A. M. Turner and A. Vishwanath, Entanglement Entropy of Gapped Phases and
Topological Order in Three dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 84 (2011) 195120, [1108.4038].
[22] J. Bhattacharya, M. Nozaki, T. Takayanagi and T. Ugajin, Thermodynamical Property of
Entanglement Entropy for Excited States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 091602, [1212.1164].
[23] W.-z. Guo, S. He and J. Tao, Note on Entanglement Temperature for Low Thermal Excited
States in Higher Derivative Gravity, JHEP 08 (2013) 050, [1305.2682].
[24] D. Allahbakhshi, M. Alishahiha and A. Naseh, Entanglement Thermodynamics, JHEP 08
(2013) 102, [1305.2728].
[25] S. He, D. Li and J.-B. Wu, Entanglement Temperature in Non-conformal Cases, JHEP 10
(2013) 142, [1308.0819].
[26] C. Park, Thermodynamic law from the entanglement entropy bound, Phys. Rev. D 93
(2016) 086003, [1511.02288].
[27] F.-L. Lin and B. Ning, Relative Entropy and Torsion Coupling, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 883
(2017) 012016.
[28] A. Ghosh and R. Mishra, Generalized geodesic deviation equations and an entanglement
first law for rotating BTZ black holes, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 126005, [1607.01178].
[29] Y. Sun and L. Zhao, Holographic entanglement entropies for Schwarzschild and
Reisner-Nordström black holes in asymptotically Minkowski spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 95
(2017) 086014, [1611.06442].
[30] A. O’Bannon, J. Probst, R. Rodgers and C. F. Uhlemann, First law of entanglement rates
from holography, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 066028, [1612.07769].
[31] A. Bhattacharya and S. Roy, Holographic entanglement entropy and entanglement
thermodynamics of ‘black’ non-susy D3 brane, Phys. Lett. B 781 (2018) 232–237,
[1712.03740].
[32] A. Bhattacharya, K. T. Grosvenor and S. Roy, Entanglement Entropy and Subregion

– 23 –
 Complexity in Thermal Perturbations around Pure-AdS Spacetime, Phys. Rev. D 100
(2019) 126004, [1905.02220].
[33] S. F. Lokhande, G. W. J. Oling and J. F. Pedraza, Linear response of entanglement entropy
from holography, JHEP 10 (2017) 104, [1705.10324].
[34] E. Caceres, P. H. Nguyen and J. F. Pedraza, Holographic entanglement chemistry, Phys.
Rev. D 95 (2017) 106015, [1605.00595].
[35] D. D. Blanco, H. Casini, L.-Y. Hung and R. C. Myers, Relative Entropy and Holography,
JHEP 08 (2013) 060, [1305.3182].
[36] S. He, J.-R. Sun and H.-Q. Zhang, On Holographic Entanglement Entropy with Second
Order Excitations, Nucl. Phys. B 928 (2018) 160–181, [1411.6213].
[37] X. Dong, Holographic Entanglement Entropy for General Higher Derivative Gravity, JHEP
01 (2014) 044, [1310.5713].
[38] S. S. Pal and S. Panda, Entanglement temperature with Gauss–Bonnet term, Nucl. Phys. B
898 (2015) 401–414, [1507.06488].
[39] Y. Sun, H. Xu and L. Zhao, Thermodynamics and holographic entanglement entropy for
spherical black holes in 5D Gauss-Bonnet gravity, JHEP 09 (2016) 060, [1606.06531].
[40] P. Bueno, V. S. Min, A. J. Speranza and M. R. Visser, Entanglement equilibrium for higher
order gravity, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 046003, [1612.04374].
[41] F. M. Haehl, E. Hijano, O. Parrikar and C. Rabideau, Higher Curvature Gravity from
Entanglement in Conformal Field Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 201602,
[1712.06620].
[42] N. I. Gushterov, A. O’Bannon and R. Rodgers, On Holographic Entanglement Density,
JHEP 10 (2017) 137, [1708.09376].
[43] J. Erdmenger and N. Miekley, Non-local observables at finite temperature in AdS/CFT,
JHEP 03 (2018) 034, [1709.07016].
[44] H. Nadi, B. Mirza, Z. Sherkatghanad and Z. Mirzaiyan, Holographic entanglement first law
for d + 1 dimensional rotating cylindrical black holes, Nucl. Phys. B 949 (2019) 114822,
[1904.11344].
[45] A. Saha, S. Gangopadhyay and J. P. Saha, Holographic entanglement entropy and
generalized entanglement temperature, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 106008, [1906.03159].
[46] M. Fujita, S. He and Y. Sun, Thermodynamical property of entanglement entropy and
deconfinement phase transition, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 126019, [2005.01048].
[47] S. Maulik and H. Singh, Entanglement entropy and the first law at third order for boosted
black branes, JHEP 04 (2021) 065, [2012.09530].
[48] F. F. Santos, Entanglement Entropy in Horndeski Gravity, 2201.02500.
[49] B. Swingle and T. Senthil, Universal crossovers between entanglement entropy and thermal
entropy, Phys. Rev. B 87 (2013) 045123, [1112.1069].
[50] V. E. Hubeny, Extremal surfaces as bulk probes in AdS/CFT, JHEP 07 (2012) 093,
[1203.1044].
[51] H. Liu and M. Mezei, Probing renormalization group flows using entanglement entropy,
JHEP 01 (2014) 098, [1309.6935].

– 24 –
[52] L. Bombelli, R. K. Koul, J. Lee and R. D. Sorkin, A Quantum Source of Entropy for Black
Holes, Phys. Rev. D 34 (1986) 373–383.
[53] M. Srednicki, Entropy and area, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 666–669, [hep-th/9303048].
[54] M. B. Hastings, An area law for one-dimensional quantum systems, J. Stat. Mech. 0708
(2007) P08024, [0705.2024].
[55] J. Eisert, M. Cramer and M. B. Plenio, Area laws for the entanglement entropy - a review,
Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 277–306, [0808.3773].
[56] R. C. Myers and A. Singh, Comments on Holographic Entanglement Entropy and RG
Flows, JHEP 04 (2012) 122, [1202.2068].
[57] H. Casini and M. Huerta, On the RG running of the entanglement entropy of a circle, Phys.
Rev. D 85 (2012) 125016, [1202.5650].
[58] H. Casini, E. Teste and G. Torroba, Relative entropy and the RG flow, JHEP 03 (2017)
089, [1611.00016].
[59] A. B. Zamolodchikov, Irreversibility of the Flux of the Renormalization Group in a 2D Field
Theory, JETP Lett. 43 (1986) 730–732.
[60] J. L. Cardy, Is There a c Theorem in Four-Dimensions?, Phys. Lett. B 215 (1988) 749–752.
[61] Z. Komargodski and A. Schwimmer, On Renormalization Group Flows in Four Dimensions,
JHEP 12 (2011) 099, [1107.3987].
[62] Z. Komargodski, The Constraints of Conformal Symmetry on RG Flows, JHEP 07 (2012)
069, [1112.4538].
[63] D. L. Jafferis, I. R. Klebanov, S. S. Pufu and B. R. Safdi, Towards the F-Theorem: N=2
Field Theories on the Three-Sphere, JHEP 06 (2011) 102, [1103.1181].
[64] I. R. Klebanov, S. S. Pufu and B. R. Safdi, F-Theorem without Supersymmetry, JHEP 10
(2011) 038, [1105.4598].
[65] R. C. Myers and A. Sinha, Seeing a c-theorem with holography, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010)
046006, [1006.1263].
[66] R. C. Myers and A. Sinha, Holographic c-theorems in arbitrary dimensions, JHEP 01
(2011) 125, [1011.5819].
[67] H. Casini and M. Huerta, A Finite entanglement entropy and the c-theorem, Phys. Lett. B
600 (2004) 142–150, [hep-th/0405111].
[68] C.-S. Chu and D. Giataganas, c-Theorem for Anisotropic RG Flows from Holographic
Entanglement Entropy, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 046007, [1906.09620].
[69] C. Park, D. Ro and J. Hun Lee, c-theorem of the entanglement entropy, JHEP 11 (2018)
165, [1806.09072].
[70] C. Park and J. Hun Lee, Exotic RG flow of entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020)
086008, [1910.05741].
[71] D. Giataganas, U. Gürsoy and J. F. Pedraza, Strongly-coupled anisotropic gauge theories
and holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 121601, [1708.05691].
[72] M. Baggioli and D. Giataganas, Detecting Topological Quantum Phase Transitions via the
c-Function, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 026009, [2007.07273].

– 25 –
[73] S. Cremonini, L. Li, K. Ritchie and Y. Tang, Constraining nonrelativistic RG flows with
holography, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 046006, [2006.10780].
[74] C. Hoyos, N. Jokela, J. M. Penı́n, A. V. Ramallo and J. Tarrı́o, Risking your NEC, JHEP
10 (2021) 112, [2104.11749].
[75] C. Cartwright and M. Kaminski, Inverted c-functions in thermal states, 2107.12409.
[76] I. Y. Aref’eva, A. Patrushev and P. Slepov, Holographic entanglement entropy in
anisotropic background with confinement-deconfinement phase transition, JHEP 07 (2020)
043, [2003.05847].
[77] S. Cremonini and X. Dong, Constraints on renormalization group flows from holographic
entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 065041, [1311.3307].
[78] M. Headrick and T. Takayanagi, A Holographic proof of the strong subadditivity of
entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 106013, [0704.3719].
[79] A. C. Wall, Maximin Surfaces, and the Strong Subadditivity of the Covariant Holographic
Entanglement Entropy, Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 225007, [1211.3494].
[80] M. Nozaki, T. Numasawa and T. Takayanagi, Holographic Local Quenches and
Entanglement Density, JHEP 05 (2013) 080, [1302.5703].
[81] J. Bhattacharya, V. E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi, Entanglement density
and gravitational thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 106009, [1412.5472].
[82] D. Giataganas, N. Pappas and N. Toumbas, Holographic Observables at Large d,
2110.14606.
[83] S. A. Hartnoll, A. Lucas and S. Sachdev, Holographic quantum matter, 1612.07324.
[84] J. Zaanen, Y.-W. Sun, Y. Liu and K. Schalm, Holographic Duality in Condensed Matter
Physics. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015.
[85] M. Ammon and J. Erdmenger, Gauge/gravity duality. Cambridge Univ. Pr., Cambridge,
UK, 2015.
[86] M. Baggioli, Applied Holography: A Practical Mini-Course. SpringerBriefs in Physics.
Springer, 2019, 10.1007/978-3-030-35184-7.
[87] T. Albash and C. V. Johnson, Holographic Studies of Entanglement Entropy in
Superconductors, JHEP 05 (2012) 079, [1202.2605].
[88] T. Takayanagi, Entanglement Entropy from a Holographic Viewpoint, Class. Quant. Grav.
29 (2012) 153001, [1204.2450].
[89] R.-G. Cai, S. He, L. Li and Y.-L. Zhang, Holographic Entanglement Entropy in
Insulator/Superconductor Transition, JHEP 07 (2012) 088, [1203.6620].
[90] R.-G. Cai, S. He, L. Li and L.-F. Li, Entanglement Entropy and Wilson Loop in Stückelberg
Holographic Insulator/Superconductor Model, JHEP 10 (2012) 107, [1209.1019].
[91] R.-G. Cai, S. He, L. Li and Y.-L. Zhang, Holographic Entanglement Entropy on P-wave
Superconductor Phase Transition, JHEP 07 (2012) 027, [1204.5962].
[92] R.-G. Cai, L. Li, L.-F. Li and R.-K. Su, Entanglement Entropy in Holographic P-Wave
Superconductor/Insulator Model, JHEP 06 (2013) 063, [1303.4828].
[93] L.-F. Li, R.-G. Cai, L. Li and C. Shen, Entanglement entropy in a holographic p-wave
superconductor model, Nucl. Phys. B 894 (2015) 15–28, [1310.6239].

– 26 –
 [94] C. V. Johnson, Large N Phase Transitions, Finite Volume, and Entanglement Entropy,
JHEP 03 (2014) 047, [1306.4955].
[95] A. Dutta and S. K. Modak, Holographic entanglement entropy in imbalanced
superconductors, JHEP 01 (2014) 136, [1305.6740].
[96] X.-M. Kuang, E. Papantonopoulos and B. Wang, Entanglement Entropy as a Probe of the
Proximity Effect in Holographic Superconductors, JHEP 05 (2014) 130, [1401.5720].
[97] Y. Peng and Q. Pan, Holographic entanglement entropy in general holographic
superconductor models, JHEP 06 (2014) 011, [1404.1659].
[98] A. M. Garcı́a-Garcı́a and A. Romero-Bermúdez, Conductivity and entanglement entropy of
high dimensional holographic superconductors, JHEP 09 (2015) 033, [1502.03616].
[99] Y. Peng, Holographic entanglement entropy in superconductor phase transition with dark
matter sector, Phys. Lett. B 750 (2015) 420–426, [1507.07399].
[100] Y. Peng, Q. Pan and Y. Liu, A general holographic insulator/superconductor model with
dark matter sector away from the probe limit, Nucl. Phys. B 915 (2017) 69–83,
[1512.08950].
[101] Y. Liu, Y. Gong and B. Wang, Non-equilibrium condensation process in holographic
superconductor with nonlinear electrodynamics, JHEP 02 (2016) 116, [1505.03603].
[102] W. Yao and J. Jing, Holographic entanglement entropy in metal/superconductor phase
transition with exponential nonlinear electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B 759 (2016) 533–540,
[1603.04516].
[103] X.-X. Zeng and L.-F. Li, Holographic Phase Transition Probed by Nonlocal Observables,
Adv. High Energy Phys. 2016 (2016) 6153435, [1609.06535].
[104] Y. Peng and G. Liu, Holographic entanglement entropy in two-order
insulator/superconductor transitions, Phys. Lett. B 767 (2017) 330–335, [1607.08305].
[105] M. Kord Zangeneh, Y. C. Ong and B. Wang, Entanglement Entropy and Complexity for
One-Dimensional Holographic Superconductors, Phys. Lett. B771 (2017) 235–241,
[1704.00557].
[106] S. R. Das, M. Fujita and B. S. Kim, Holographic entanglement entropy of a 1 + 1
dimensional p-wave superconductor, JHEP 09 (2017) 016, [1705.10392].
[107] W. Yao, C. Yang and J. Jing, Holographic insulator/superconductor transition with
exponential nonlinear electrodynamics probed by entanglement entropy, Eur. Phys. J. C 78
(2018) 353, [1805.02328].
[108] D. Dudal and S. Mahapatra, Interplay between the holographic QCD phase diagram and
entanglement entropy, JHEP 07 (2018) 120, [1805.02938].
[109] H. Guo, X.-M. Kuang and B. Wang, Holographic entanglement entropy and complexity in
Stückelberg superconductor, Phys. Lett. B 797 (2019) 134879, [1902.07945].
[110] F. Lalehgani Dezaki, B. Mirza, M. Moradzadeh and Z. Sherkatghanad, Topological
invariants of the Ryu-Takayanagi (RT ) surface used to observe holographic superconductor
phase transition, Nucl. Phys. B 944 (2019) 114647, [1905.01632].
[111] P. Liu and J.-P. Wu, Mixed state entanglement and thermal phase transitions, Phys. Rev. D
104 (2021) 046017, [2009.01529].

– 27 –
[112] I.-H. Chen, P.-S. Huang and S.-Y. Wu, Entanglement of Purification for Momentum
Relaxed Superconductor, 2112.14092.
[113] W. Yao, Q. Yang, X. Liu and J. Jing, Holographic entanglement entropy in general
holographic superconductor models with logarithmic nonlinear electrodynamics, Eur. Phys.
J. C 81 (2021) 355.
[114] M. Reza Mohammadi Mozaffar, A. Mollabashi and F. Omidi, Non-local Probes in
Holographic Theories with Momentum Relaxation, JHEP 10 (2016) 135, [1608.08781].
[115] M. R. Tanhayi and R. Vazirian, Higher-curvature Corrections to Holographic Entanglement
with Momentum Dissipation, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 162, [1610.08080].
[116] K. K. Kim, C. Park, J. Hun Lee and B. Ahn, Holographic entanglement entropy with
momentum relaxation, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 377, [1804.00412].
[117] Y.-Z. Li and X.-M. Kuang, Probes of holographic thermalization in a simple model with
momentum relaxation, Nucl. Phys. B 956 (2020) 115043, [1911.11980].
[118] Y.-f. Huang, Z.-j. Shi, C. Niu, C.-y. Zhang and P. Liu, Mixed State Entanglement for
Holographic Axion Model, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 426, [1911.10977].
[119] P. Liu, C. Niu, Z.-J. Shi and C.-Y. Zhang, Entanglement wedge minimum cross-section in
holographic massive gravity theory, JHEP 08 (2021) 113, [2104.08070].
[120] F.-J. Cheng, Z. Yang, C. Niu, C.-Y. Zhang and P. Liu, Entanglement Wedge Cross Section
in Holographic Axion Gravity Theories, 2109.03696.
[121] V. Balasubramanian and P. Kraus, A Stress tensor for Anti-de Sitter gravity, Commun.
Math. Phys. 208 (1999) 413–428, [hep-th/9902121].
[122] S. de Haro, S. N. Solodukhin and K. Skenderis, Holographic reconstruction of space-time
and renormalization in the AdS / CFT correspondence, Commun. Math. Phys. 217 (2001)
595–622, [hep-th/0002230].
[123] A. Lewkowycz and J. Maldacena, Generalized gravitational entropy, JHEP 08 (2013) 090,
[1304.4926].
[124] S. A. Hartnoll, C. P. Herzog and G. T. Horowitz, Building a Holographic Superconductor,
Phys.Rev.Lett. 101 (2008) 031601, [0803.3295].
[125] S. A. Hartnoll, C. P. Herzog and G. T. Horowitz, Holographic Superconductors, JHEP 0812
(2008) 015, [0810.1563].
[126] B. Goutéraux and E. Mefford, Normal charge densities in quantum critical superfluids,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020) 161604, [1912.08849].
[127] B. Goutéraux and E. Mefford, Non-vanishing zero-temperature normal density in
holographic superfluids, JHEP 11 (2020) 091, [2008.02289].
[128] D. Arean, M. Baggioli, S. Grieninger and K. Landsteiner, A Holographic Superfluid
Symphony, 2107.08802.
[129] M. Ammon, D. Arean, M. Baggioli, S. Gray and S. Grieninger, Pseudo-spontaneous U (1)
Symmetry Breaking in Hydrodynamics and Holography, 2111.10305.
[130] H.-S. Jeong and K.-Y. Kim, Homes’ law in holographic superconductor with linear-T
resistivity, 2112.01153.
[131] M. Baggioli and G. Frangi, Holographic Supersolids, 2202.03745.

– 28 –
[132] R.-Q. Yang, H.-S. Jeong, C. Niu and K.-Y. Kim, Complexity of Holographic
Superconductors, JHEP 04 (2019) 146, [1902.07586].
[133] M. Baggioli, K.-Y. Kim, L. Li and W.-J. Li, Holographic Axion Model: a simple gravitational
tool for quantum matter, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 64 (2021) 270001, [2101.01892].
[134] H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim and Y.-W. Sun, Bound of diffusion constants from pole-skipping
points: spontaneous symmetry breaking and magnetic field, JHEP 07 (2021) 105,
[2104.13084].
[135] H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim and Y.-W. Sun, The breakdown of magneto-hydrodynamics near
AdS2 fixed point and energy diffusion bound, 2105.03882.
[136] L. Rademaker, Tower of states and the entanglement spectrum in a coplanar
antiferromagnet, Physical Review B 92 (oct, 2015) .
[137] B. Kulchytskyy, C. M. Herdman, S. Inglis and R. G. Melko, Detecting Goldstone Modes
with Entanglement Entropy, Phys. Rev. B 92 (2015) 115146, [1502.01722].
[138] S.-E. Bak, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim and Y.-W. Sun, working in progress, .
[139] B. Chen, B. Czech and Z.-z. Wang, Quantum Information in Holographic Duality,
2108.09188.
[140] H. Casini and M. Huerta, Lectures on entanglement in quantum field theory, 2201.13310.

– 29 –